Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The BPA Myth - Environmentalists are unbendable on plastics.
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE ^ | April 7, 2010 | Iain Murray

Posted on 04/07/2010 2:16:56 PM PDT by neverdem

The BPA Myth

Environmentalists are unbendable on plastics.

 

On Thursday, April 1, Time published a list of the “ten most common household toxins,” focused on plastics. It claimed, “Chemicals in plastics and other products seem harmless, but mounting evidence links them to health problems — and Washington lacks the power to protect us.” Top of the list was Bisphenol A, or BPA for short.

BPA is an important ingredient in many of the plastic products that have made modern life inexpensive and convenient. BPA is used to make shatterproof water bottles, CDs, food and beverage cans, sporting equipment, eyeglass lenses, and countless medical supplies. Environmentalists argue that it is a toxic substance that should be banned. But there is little scientific evidence that suggests BPA is harmful, and much that suggests it is not.

California provides a good example of how the environmentalists have waged their war. On July 15, 2009, the state’s Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee voted not to list BPA as a reproductive toxicant under the terms of California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). The very same day, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) submitted a 327-page petition to the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to begin a different process by which BPA could be listed as a reproductive toxicant.

The NRDC petition is pathetically weak. It includes as evidence a 2008 National Toxicology Program (NTP) report that showed no harm to humans from BPA, but called for further study. That study is now under way at the federal level, with the National Institutes of Health spending $30 million on research over the next two years. Neither the petition or the NTP report provides any reason for California to ban the substance before the results of the study come in.

Other evidence favors keeping BPA on the market. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report published in the scholarly journal Toxicological Sciences in October 2009 also showed no harm to humans from BPA.

The state — which is mired in budget crisis — is wasting public funds to indulge the whims of a single special-interest group. Yet it is not just taxpayer money that is at stake. NRDC is sending a message to businesses nationwide: If you use BPA — whether to make toys, eyeglasses, or medical equipment — don’t invest here. For no company will invest in a state — and thus create jobs and expand facilities in that state — if the state is threatening to stop manufacturing in the near future. NRDC’s whim is helping to prolong California’s recession.

Ironically, the same EPA study that found no effect from BPA found significant effects from the oral contraceptive Ethinyl Estradiol. Yet when environmental groups are asked whether they should campaign against contraceptive use, they prevaricate. Curt Cunningham, water-quality-issues chairman for the Rocky Mountain Chapter of Sierra Club International, dismissed such demands in 2007, saying, “I suspect people would not take kindly to that. . . . For many people, it’s an economic necessity.” Only ideology can explain such a double standard.

The war against BPA is an unrelenting, well-funded propaganda campaign to disregard science in favor of ideology. Every time science scores a victory, the environmental establishment opens another front. When that fails, the groups try to undermine investment in technologies they oppose. In all of this, they are aided by willing allies in the media, who are only too happy to scare people about some new imagined horror, even if it means keeping those same people out of work. We should condemn Time for joining in the environmentalist assault on science.

— Iain Murray is vice president for strategy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. His book, The Really Inconvenient Truths (Regnery, 2008), includes a discussion of the hypocrisy of environmental groups over contraceptives.



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bisphenola; bpa; environmentalism; environmentalists; epa; reproductivetoxicant

1 posted on 04/07/2010 2:16:56 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

No harm found but it does show up in your urine...


2 posted on 04/07/2010 2:22:57 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Impeachment !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Reproductive toxicant ping, but they won’t touch birth control pills.


3 posted on 04/07/2010 2:25:16 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I’ve run into the NRDC crazies before. They need to be crushed with counter lawsuits for damages.


4 posted on 04/07/2010 2:28:20 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Yes, no harm. Just because a particular substance is detected in a human body doesn't mean it is harmful or toxic. You can find minuscule amounts of just about any chemical in the blood and urine if you're willing to measure for it in parts per billion or in parts per trillion.

Irrational fears come from irrational people. The left is filled with these types.

5 posted on 04/07/2010 2:47:56 PM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Thanks for this ping. I am appalled at the enviro-ideologues’ virus-like replication of multiple much ado about nothing.
6 posted on 04/07/2010 3:53:18 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Dopeler effect (n): The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

When I was working my way through college I worked in a small “semi-works” chemical plant and one of our specialty items was Bisphenol A Dimethacrylate. It was the main ingredient in dental bonding and temp. filling resins. I suspect that a lot more BPA found its way into people’s blood from this application than what migrates out of baby and water bottles.

Last I checked it’s still used.


7 posted on 04/07/2010 3:56:26 PM PDT by JeanLM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It’s not a myth. Even tiny amounts of BPA can cause reproductive and sexual development problems. This IS hard science.

You can start your research into the dangers of BPA at Dr. Mercola’s site, but there is so much evidence it’s crazy to minimize the dangers.

The problems associated with BPA include:

* Structural damage to the brain
* Hyperactivity
* Abnormal sexual behavior
* Increased fat formation
* Early puberty
* Disrupted reproductive cycles

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/04/27/plastics.aspx

We have a responsibility to G-d to keep our bodies healthy, and protect our unborn children.


8 posted on 04/07/2010 4:01:18 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

Oh, yeah, and that is why our birth rates are so low and why the life expectancy, since the invention of plastics, has increased dramatically. These killer plastics are doing us all in. Get real, if you have to worry about something worry about how the government wants to make a slave out of you. Some people are just to damn stupid for words(yep, that includes you).


9 posted on 04/07/2010 4:15:32 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

I read the website, but there is no hard science there. You know, a double-blind study showing real harm, even to lab animals. If there was such a study, that showed any results like that,you can bet they’d be shouting it from every rooftop. Since that site, and the rest of the information about BPA, is lacking that, I am inclined to think that the adverse effects have proven mostly unfounded.


10 posted on 04/07/2010 4:45:36 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mase

Agree.


11 posted on 04/07/2010 4:51:12 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Impeachment !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: El Gato; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; lepton; LadyDoc; jb6; tiamat; PGalt; Dianna; ...
Study links dogs, not cats, to kids' asthma risk

New Agent Chokes Off Energy Supply, Kills Cancer Cells

BUSPH study links rheumatoid arthritis to vitamin D deficiency

OptiNose's novel intranasal sumatriptan product highly effective in treating migraines

FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.

12 posted on 04/07/2010 6:06:18 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
No harm found but it does show up in your urine...

Doesn't that mean your body is getting rid of it?

13 posted on 04/07/2010 6:53:01 PM PDT by raybbr (I hate B(ig) H(ead) Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mase

Think lead. It is the biggest boondoggle out there.


14 posted on 04/07/2010 6:56:01 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
The problems associated with BPA include:

* Structural damage to the brain

* Hyperactivity

* Abnormal sexual behavior

* Increased fat formation

* Early puberty

* Disrupted reproductive cycles

Ironically all the problems "associated" have one thing in common: They are so vague they are undefinable.

That is a certain sign of modern liberal thinking.

15 posted on 04/07/2010 6:59:12 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

LOL! I thought this was about Bonneville Power Administration — BPA to us here in Oregon.


16 posted on 04/07/2010 9:33:40 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Hope so.


17 posted on 04/08/2010 5:12:09 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Impeachment !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

LOL moreso! I thought it was the Business Professionals of America.


18 posted on 04/08/2010 1:03:47 PM PDT by I Buried My Guns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

I dumped all my plastic containers in favor of glass a while back. Sometimes common sense is more relevant than scientific proof beyond a reasonable doubt.


19 posted on 04/09/2010 1:34:45 AM PDT by SupplySider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson